GANGA SINGH CHAUHAN,GWALIOR vs. DCIT 1(1), GWALIOR

ITA 144/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 October 2026AY 2021-226 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,20,000/- (for AY 2020-21) and Rs. 10,45,000/- (for AY 2021-22) as unaccounted cash. The reassessment proceedings were initiated based on information from a search on the Bansal Group, which allegedly found documents indicating cash received by the assessee. However, the assessment order did not specify the nature of these incriminating documents or loose papers. Crucially, there was no record to suggest that copies of these documents were ever furnished to the assessee. The Tribunal found that the AO made the addition merely on guesswork, reasoning that since the assessee had business dealings with Bansal Construction Works Pvt. Ltd., the cash payment could not be ruled out. The Tribunal concluded that the foundation of the detection was not disclosed, and there was no prima facie documentary or oral evidence to sustain the impugned additions. Therefore, the additions were deleted, and the impugned orders confirming them were deemed unsustainable. The principle established is that additions based on undisclosed incriminating material, without providing the same to the assessee, are not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Ganga Singh Chauhan, proprietor of Chauhan Road Lines, is an individual engaged in transport logistics. The appeals challenge orders for Assessment Years 2020-21 and 2021-22. For AY 2020-21, the Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 12,20,000/- on account of unaccounted cash, invoking Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This addition stemmed from a search and seizure action on the Bansal Group of Bhopal on 18.11.2022, which allegedly revealed documents indicating cash payment of Rs. 12,20,000/- to the assessee from Bansal Construction Works Pvt. Ltd. Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 were initiated. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (CIT(A)) dismissed the assessee's appeal. For AY 2021-22, a similar addition of Rs. 10,45,000/- was made. The assessee's appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) were not pressed by the assessee, but the Tribunal decided the matters on merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Learned CIT(A)/Assessing Officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 12,20,000/- (for AY 2020-21) and Rs. 10,45,000/- (for AY 2021-22) to the income of the assessee as unaccounted cash under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contentions: - The Learned CIT(A)/Assessing Officer erred in facts and circumstances by making the addition. - The Assessing Officer did not provide any material on which he relied for making the addition. - Any other point will be raised at the time of hearing. Revenue's Contentions: - The Department's Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR) appeared and argued the case. The specific contentions of the revenue are not detailed in the judgment, but it is implied they supported the additions made by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 250,Section 147,Section 151,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 12.10.2026Pronounced: 13.10.2026

PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JM. The facts and issues involved in both these appeals are almost identical, hence, for the sake of convenience and brevity, these appeals are being decided by this common order. The facts of ITA No. 143/Agr/2026 are only being narrated as under.

2.

This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 22.12.2025 passed in Appeal No NFAC/2019-20/10467237 by the ld

ITA No.143&144/Agr/2026

Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC(DELHI) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act), for the A.Y. 2020-21, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal, against the addition

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →